Which philosophers consider you to be most literary and therefore still allowed in this board?
Will only continental philosophy remain on /lit/?
Personally I'd consider all philosophers with written work acceptable to discuss on /lit/.
The 2 guys spamming the threads with
are a bunch of faggots ruining the board.
/lit/ has been my home for a long time and restricting the conversation on things which are clearly related to literature is purely retarded.
Thats why boards die.
I don't want /lit/ to be another board in the ashes.
Lucretius. he's double banned for being one of the best poets of the Roman Republic and one of the best philosophers of all time. he's still relevant in any thread about gore sex fiction though :D
Honestly I have no idea why philosophy can't be discussed on both boards. I mean /his/ is obviously going to be filled with thousands of teenagers who will have little philosophical knowledge outside of Kant or the Greeks. I think it would be cool to have two distinct philosophic cultures between the two boards.
Anyways, /lit/ has developed a culture of philosophic debate and quasi-study over the years. /his/ is a virgin board that lacks any culture, hell just yesterday they had several threads dedicated to creating a loli ghost mascot. Does anyone actually think that board is going to have any meaningful discussion for at-least 6 months?
Honestly this whole "board shake up" is borderline retarded. All it is going to do is leave /lit/ a hipster wasteland, and /his/ a pseudo-philosophy board. At the same time all the "intellectuals" of /lit/'s population is going to have a mass exodus off of this board and trust me they aren't going to /his/.
That's not the point at all. /lit/ will most likely engage literature with philosophical undertones on its narrative and the implications of the moral dilemmas, assumptions, etc. on the human life. /his/ will have a more political attonation and focus more on historical continuity and its concrete impact on history and society.
Because when I was a teenager I read Kant and enjoyed talking about him with my friends. I mean he isn't tremendously hard to understand.
Hegal on the other hand is a whole different story.
Huxley. he's banned for writing about philosophy, French history, medical history, religious history, his acid trip, Mosley and British fascism, and for lecturing in Santa Barbara on the human condition.
There are two doors now: one that says Philosophy and one that says Literature. And instead of just knowing that people will rely on their common sense and judgment to determine where a thread goes, they're throwing a huge tantrum and protesting the existence of the doors, saying we should merge them.
If universities can have a Philosophy department that's separate from an English department, we can have a /his/ and a /lit/. It's not complicated.
Jostein Gaardner. he's banned for writing a better novel about a teenager dying of cancer than John Green could ever hope for but making the mistake of putting thought into it and making it an argument about empirical reality.
he's also banned for Sophie's World which is clearly philosophy trying to sneak past the censor and mathematics trying to use the Lewis Carroll defense. How can we put up with that shit?
>protesting the existence of the doors, saying we should merge them
Philosophy has been part of /lit/'s culture for years (because it's largely part of literature in the first place).
It's like wanting to remove porn from /b/ because specific porn boards exist.
Gore Vidal is banned here for his political outbursts, historical novels, and philosophical tone. You'll have to speak louder if you want me to hear your nambypamby objections over the sound of napalm burning air.
Swedenborg. he's banned for being right while a religious prophet, his philosophy, influencing Kant, and writing poetry in New Latin which nobody has read since Goethe. it's fine to still discuss his influence on Stephen King, so it's no real loss.
Dostoevsky involved philosophical questions of God and man's nature in his works. I guess /his/ should be the only place where "crime and punishment" and "the brothers karamazov" can be discussed.
Omar Khayyam. he's banned for writing philosophy, writing mathematics, writing calendars, writing religious poetry, and, sin of all sins, mathematical philosophy. his persian is also kind of outdated compared to farsi.
Chuang Tzu. he's banned for his stories which advocate a care free approach to life and an absence of striving for happiness.
The average /lit/ poster, the day philosophers were /his/ shitposted off the board.
"To be truly ignorant, be content with your own knowledge." - Zhuangzi
Ironically applicable to the many "fiction only" plebs attempting to rid the board of enlightened philosophical discussion.
Anthony Burgess. banned for writing puns in dead languages, being a philologist, writing non-fiction and philosophical fiction. don't not ever mention Beethoven or his name again on this board.
I would like to argue with you, but I could be banned for arguing/discussing philosophy.
So I will have to resort to using pure literature.
Read, The Man in the High Castle and/or Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.
That is all I can legally say.
Making a hard judgement on the basis of one poorly researched and very recent sticky post, rather than critical reasoning to assess the evidence.
>how are there even people who want philosophical discussion removed
They feel insecure about their own reading ability and don't want to seem challenged by more difficult material.
This thread is a shitpost or at least exceptionally shitposty due to the resent board turmoil and the fact that this thread has de facto become the containment/discussion thread of said turmoil.
But I mean the philosophy threads on /lit/ for the past few months haven't been terrible or altogether great. Philosophy is ingrained into /lit/ anyways, it seems like we are suck with slightly above average content on /lit/, or high school tier content on /his//
I guess ones that are still alive? Chomsky, Zizek etc... I don't think any of them care to assess the literariness of any of us, nor do they have any strong feelings about us being on this board nkr the existence of 4chan in general
I was studying Kant at 16.
When I started seriously writing at 18, I considered my non-fiction to be very much neo-Kantian. I revised them a bit and included them in my first book, which was published when I was 23.
It's called not being a moron who let themselves be dictated by public schools and ageist lies.
>I guess ones that are still alive
Correct. Once they are no longer with us, they become part of /his/tory.
Every book adapted for screenplay also becomes banned, as discussion must be relegated to /tv/.
John Berger. banned for being an art critic, supporting the Black Panther Party, being a philosopher, general political writings, writing about Spinoza in fiction, writing about Picasso, and generally being a Marxist humanist. Fuck your Man Booker prize, John, we see right through you.
Pic related: A great philosophical work also written by a man of 23.
That is very swell my autistic friend. I think what he meant was that Kant would not be a likely candidate for a philosopher that edgy teens are versed in. You could have said Nietzsche or Chomsky or Marx but you said Kant like an autist with no comprehension of reality
>gets ignored because everyone else is busy trying to prove/disprove god in the 1200000000 christpost of that day doesn't count
we've banned doestoevsky for plagiarism, and tolstoy for anarchist christianity, there shouldn't be any christposting left.
I'm enjoying it. This is far more entertaining than the usual DFW shitmemes. Ironically, there's more /phil/ related threads on /lit/ now than there has been for a while. Enjoy your backlash.
Nabokov. banned for writing Notes on Prosody; criticism of literature; writing Speak, Memory, an obvious attempt at non-fiction autobiography; writing on the Cold War for The New Yorker; and for writings on lepidoptery. His pedophilia books we can still talk about.
Mayakovsky. banned for writing Talking with a Taxman about Poetry, for creating agitpop posters, for writing criticism, for political motivation, and for writing travelogues, sometimes barely disguised as poetry. He also never wrote a novel in his life.
no then I'd have to write details about his life not work, like him being found with this poem in his pocket when he shot himself in the gutter outside his exlover's flat
>Past one o’clock. You must have gone to bed.
>The Milky Way streams silver through the night.
>I’m in no hurry; with lightning telegrams
>I have no cause to wake or trouble you.
>And, as they say, the incident is closed.
>Love’s boat has smashed against the daily grind.
>Now you and I are quits. Why bother then
>To balance mutual sorrows, pains, and hurts.
>Behold what quiet settles on the world.
>Night wraps the sky in tribute from the stars.
>In hours like these, one rises to address
>The ages, history, and all creation.
Antonin Artaud. banned for his correspondence with his editor, for his manifesto of the theatre of the absurd, for his writing for avantgarde films, for his Mexican ethnography and peyote trip reports, for going back to the manifesto to write The Theatre and Its Double, and for the anti-American sentiment he was first banned for in real life.
Peter Brook. banned for writing The Empty Space, and using non-fictional sources as the basis of plays. Who gives a shit if he's the director of the Royal Shakespeare Company during the first English production of Marat/Sade, Marat/Sade are both still >>>/his/
Percy Bysshe Shelley. banned for writing Ozymandias, for influencing Karl Marx, for driving Tolstoy to anarchy, for speculating on metaphysics, for writing political tracts, for fucking Mary Shelley because she was Godwin's daughter, for his philosophy, and for being a vegetarian and annoying about it.
Blake. banned for believing he was talking to historical and religious figures, for wearing a Phrygian cap, for illustrating Wollstonecraft, for being a Swedenborgian, for supporting the French Revolution, and for writing religious ecstasies.
Milton. banned for obvious fanfiction, religious devotion to giving the Devil the best jokes, for writing an attack on censorship before publication, for writing philosophical defenses of cults, for writing endless tracts on legalizing divorce when his wife turned into a bitch, for believing in Paradise after she left, for writing history, and for writing free verse which is never a good idea any way.
Emerson. banned for writing essays on self reliance, transcendentalism, poetry, giving lectures, for talking to utilitarians, for talking to frat houses as though they were scholars, for giving lectures to Freemasons on the Philosophy of History, for ethnography of the English, and for being recognised by Nietzsche.
Thomas Carlyle. banned for writing buddhist fan fiction, obvious reference to philosophers historic and contemporary and imaginary, for writing history on Schiller, for scooping Kierkegaard, for giving John Ruskin too much of an ego, for dabbling in mathematics, and for advocating fascism and slavery. he had a good work ethic for a buddhist
Lafcadio Hearn. banned for being a newpaperman, for being too immoral for the Enquirer, for writing about creole and voodoo culture, for being a weeb creepypasta writer, for writing tracts as a female slave, for changing religions more times than a Wiccan and writing books about them, and for being one of the sole Western sources on the history of Meiji era Japan.
we are, however, still allowed to discuss that one time when Blofeld quotes him in You Only Live Twice, and James calls him out on it.
Bulgakov. he's banned for writing a biography of Moliere, for barely hiding his desire to revive Goethe's metaphysics, for writing religious and atheistic arguments, for anticommunistic sentiments, for writing a history of Stalin in Bantumi, and for being a HG Wells/Mary Shelley fanfiction writer.
History and Philosophy are also two differnt studies. And most of the time Philosophy gets closer to literature than History. Pretty sure we can still talk about the philosophic themes on Yukio Mishima, Herman Hesse, Bataille, Artaud or Nietzsche.
This reminds me.
Solomo Friedlander. totally banned for writing Kant for Kids, for making a fictional version of Oswald Spengler, for writings on Schopenhauer in his youth, for studying archaeology and history, for writing books about magic which were barely disguised Hegelianism, for writing children's stories about Fichtean dialetics, for humiliating Erich Maria Remarque, for siding with Stirner, and for self-identifying as Kant crossed with Chaplin.
Christina Rossetti. banned for discussing social problems, gender roles, salvation and other philosophical ideas in allegory, and for writing Catholic non-fiction including on Dante as though he weren't fanfiction. She is a corrupter of the youth and parents would be wise to not let their children read her goblin stories.
Sterne. banned for Tristram being nothing more than muh opinions and not even having the courtesy to use words at all times in his fiction, for writing political romance, for sermonizing, for self resurrecting after death, and for writing travelogues while diplomatically immune from being prosecuted for the sentimental abasement of readers.
Boccaccio. banned for writing in a dead language, religious overtones, historical depictions of both Venice and the Black Death, philosophically advocating chivalry and chastity while writing porn, writing Arthurian fanfiction, using numerology, pretending folk songs are fiction, and general plagiarism of previous philosophers' narrative conceits.
There's a whole section of Stephen Hero dedicated to Papa Joyce's aesthetic vision.
You know, what it means, right?
Cao Xueqin. banned for writing autobiography, for claiming truth is fiction, for writing about contemporary society, for making obvious philosophical overtures and open references to daoism and zen. at least he designed modern Chinese for us, otherwise we'd need to ban him with the rest of the classics for writing in a pointless language.
>arts belong to the humanities.
I bet that the wonderful art critique we had had here is going to be much more rare there if it'll be had at all. And if you believe it didn't exist, search the archives. It was there, and it was beautiful.
DFW banned on the grounds that New Sincerity sounds suspiciously like a philosophy of life, and worse, influenced by Buddhist ideas
Joyce, banned for setting his novels in the socio-cultural milieu of early 20th century Dublin, and that one line about history being a nightmare. Sounds like >>>his author to me
And it was off topic and shitposting.
You people saying >it's not philosophy board it's history board are blatantly ignoring the & Humanities portion, and you're doing it on purpose. The sticky even designates that board as the board for philosophy, clearly. Your only argument is
>waaah i don't like that board, it's not le gud :(
Maybe if you whiny retards made more threads about philosophy on your containment board instead of whining about not having any good threads on your containment board, you'd actually idk have threads on your containment board??
>mfw DFW, Pynchon and Joyce memers now want to be included
>mfw my face shows no mercy
Sorry, you get to say you're thoroughly unbanned on /lit/
It's all the rest of canon is the problem.
The problem is that you give a single fuck about the opinions of the moderators when they are clearly completely incompetent. But you're probably happy you don't have to read any more boring stupid philosophy and can post DFW memes in peace now.
Borges. banned for biblical and mythological references, for philosophizing, for his conundrum which claims writers write their own prehistory and therefore history, for writing on randomness, time, and historical events, and for sharing his prizes with Beckett.
This is the problem: /phil/ posters insist that if it's not philosophy, then it's shit; they are out of touch and downright contemptuous of what the board's primarily about, which is literary art.
Dylan Thomas. banned for writing his autobiography as a dog, for never writing a novel, for writing philosophy and poems about donkeys to a ridiculous extent, for contemplating the morals and methods of poisoning your husband, for writing literary critique, and for raging against death.
I was banned the other day for posting a thread about Emerson and Heidegger. Another one of my threads was just deleted. The moderators on this board are in over their heads and unworthy of their power. If you want a true commander of /lit/, someone who will kick in the door so that the whole rotten edifice will come tumbling down, rise up and force Mr. Hiroyuki Nishimura to place the crown upon my head and together we will usher in a golden age of literary discussion.
I remember, when I was in my late teens, I had finally worked my way into the bedroom of a schoolmate I had a crush on since my pre-teen years. He was a brown skinned, confident athlete with an air of cool and an incredible body that I couldn’t wait to discover. Everything was going swimmingly in our newfound courtship, until I unzipped his pants for the first time. After a fair amount of eager fumbling and foolish adolescent foreplay, I took off his pants, only to find attached this tiny, almost inconceivably small resemblance of a raisin - a miniscule currant from the most malnourished Saxifragaceae bush. I had taken my previous boyfriend from flaccid to firm before, so it wasn’t the mere fact that my beau nouveau wasn’t yet erect that was disappointing. It was the brutal reality that there wasn’t even enough flesh to be noticeable when fully hard. At his most erect point, he couldn’t possibly have been more than a baby thumb length's long or wide. That was one of the most disappointing days of my life. The second most disappointing day was when I actually wasted a whole two hours reading Otto Weininger’s “Sex And Character”. To avoid posttraumatic depression, I have to try hard not to think about those valuable minutes of my life that I will never be able to replace.
This faggots again? Lay off it dude, no one's questioning your precious literary taste, we just want to discuss philosophical themes by people who didn't feel like dressing them up in a narrative. Are you this autistic that you can't understand why someone would rash on you for wanting a philosophy-free board when there's just as much. memeing with bona fide literature threads?
Christ almighty this nigga really thinks the group of posters trying to discuss shit like aesthetics and ethics are dismissive of true art. Give me a break
m8, your post isn't worth a bump, it contains no books. i know you're not planning an endorsement of the thread by doing so, so i conclude you're new. either that or very fucking lazy about board quality.
your "we" and "your" shit is therefore mixed up- it's also often a common linguistic tell that someone is alone and/or female to use the royal "we" to try to display support which is not present. just sayin
i think you'll find that while you might want to claim you do not have a problem with on topic shit - which patently isn't the case since you bumped the thread with your self-defensive shit to revive it from page five where i left it - there certainly were people claiming that /lit/ is solely for novels, and that all the things i just described here >>7320533 should go to >>>/his/
your "us" and "them" mentality isn't good for the board. and it's transparent. you make this kind of post because you have nothing else to post. not even tidbits about how to write a weakling or a woman trying to be offensive while aware of their concealed inadequacy. no need to save rave this thread, it was a means to an adequate end, not some glory for the board.